|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Are progressive policies creating homeless, or attracting them?
by Rob Roper
Governor Scott and the House and Senate Democrat majorities are at loggerheads over the motel voucher program that pays to put up homeless in, well, motel rooms. The governor vetoed the budget adjustment bill over a $1.8 million spending increase for the program and is threatening to do so again if a revised version doesn’t remove it. So far, it doesn’t.
Though a version of motel voucher program has existed for a long time, in the past it was used as a short-term safety net usually during extreme weather conditions. However, during Covid an infusion of over $200 million in federal emergency funds and a relaxation of the requirements to participate expanded the program significantly into what amounts to de facto permanent subsidized housing. And, when the Covid emergency went away along with the federal funding, VT Democrats insisted on maintaining the program – only now at Vermont taxpayers’ expense.
So here we are with the Democrats in the legislature saying we have to keep this going because we have a homeless crisis, and the governor insisting that we cannot afford to do so and need more cost-effective solutions. Amid this debate comes the question of who exactly is using this program that cash-strapped Vermonters are paying for? Vermonters down on their luck, or a bunch of freeloaders from other states who are coming here to live off Vermont taxpayers’ many dimes.
Those who claim the latter are met with shouts that evidence supporting that theory are purely anecdotal. Which is true. It’s also true that the evidence supporting the opposite argument is purely anecdotal because nobody running the program or monitoring it keeps track of where the people using it came from. (Note to bureaucracy: maybe do this!)
But either answer is damning to our state’s progressive policies. Vermont has the fourth highest rate of homelessness in the country and were only knocked out of second place due to major, community-destroying natural disasters like the wildfires Hawaii. So, either our debilitating progressive economic policies are creating an inordinate amount of homegrown homelessness, or our overly generous progressive welfare policies are attracting homeless folks from elsewhere.
As for the first hypothesis, it’s worth noting that Vermont has one of the most highly educated populations in the nation in terms of percentages of high school, college, and post graduate degrees. Our unemployment level of 2.6 percent is tied with South Dakota for second lowest – that’s good. Our median household income is above the national average, ranking 17th from the top out of 50. Given those metrics, the legislature would have to have really done quite the job to take that level of talent and opportunity and reduced it to one of the highest per capita homeless rates in the continent! But this is plausible. Our governance is that bad.
Looking at the second hypothesis, I was struck recently by an article in Seven Days about a homeless couple. The line that jumped out at me was this one, “The couple came to Vermont in summer 2022 from Tallahassee, Fla., where they’d met on the street. Winn had done her research and knew that Vermont provided comparatively generous food stamp benefits.” Hmmmm.
So, someone who is down on their luck in Florida does some research and discovers the best place to get outsized taxpayer funded benefits is Vermont and moves here in order to get them. Though they came for the food stamps, the story opens with the protagonist and her husband excitedly learning that their stay in the motel voucher program had been extended another month so they wouldn’t have to move out. Good grub, nice digs!
Moreover, and here’s the kicker, when the subjects of this story achieved some financial independence due to a friend receiving $23,000 in back Social Security benefits, their plan was to leave Vermont for someplace, LOL, more affordable. It would be one thing if folks came here, utilized the system to get back on their feet, and then became productive members of the local economy, but our state is not set up for that (see hypothesis #1). Sadly, this plan did not come to fruition as the woman was diagnosed with cancer and the couple returned to Vermont, presumably for the medical benefits.
Now, I cast no aspersions at the folks taking advantage of our system. Them’s the rules, and they’re just playing by them to their best advantage just as the wealthy exploit loopholes in tax law, non-profits apply for grants, etc. Who wouldn’t? If you need food and someone’s handing it out, you eat it. If you’re living in a tent and someone is willing to hand you the key to a motel room, you grab it. If you’re sick and someone is willing to pay for your care, you’re sure as heck taking them up on the offer.
The question before Vermonters now is what levels of taxpayer funded charity are we willing and able to fund, under what conditions, and for whom. The progressive answers of “any level” under “any conditions” for “anybody” is not grounded in fiscal reality, nor does it ultimately play out to societies benefit. As for the question posed in the sub-headline of this post, are Vermont’s progressive policies creating or attracting a homeless crisis, I’m going to bet big that it’s a lot of both.

Rob Roper is a freelance writer who has been involved with Vermont politics and policy for over 20 years. This article reprinted with permission from Behind the Lines: Rob Roper on Vermont Politics, robertroper.substack.com
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Commentary, Housing











As someone who lives at a motel (for 3 years) full mainly with Voucher tenants, as well as having been on it at one point as well (until I got booted for working part time at Cumberland Farms), this is a topic we NEED to address more: why are we trying to house the country, if not the WORLD, while we can’t even house homeless Vermonters?
Noone wants to rent to someone who’s rental history for years is a hotel, either, so even if you are paying your own way, you are kind of stuck. Even some of the State’s benefits are denied you, since you are not considered “housed” and therefor can’t get assistance paying the rent for the only place you have.
I’ve heard it/said it myself in these pages “build it and they will come”. Now, as much as I don’t like saying it, maybe it’s time to practice “don’t build it, and they will stay away”. We just can not afford to be that freebee state where people “send their homeless, tempest-tost yerning to breathe free, , Sorry, we’re broke !
One the international level, the conventional wisdom dictates that “you cant have socialism AND open borders”. Since there are open borders between all the US states and a few of them offer a “socialist” level of benefits, people in need or desire of said benefits will naturally flock to them. Vermont taxpayers and our many non-profit/NGO advocacy groups span the spectrum in terms of what the welfare cornucopia should contain and what restrictions on access should be. There are those who claim that motel rooms are too austere and inadequate for those in need while most of us taxpaying shlubs consider even a 2 or 3 night recreational stay in a motel an unaffordable luxury when it’s coming out of our own pockets. At the very least, there ought to be some reasonable level of means testing, and some level of residency proof to establish that the claimant did not travel to Vermont only to take advantage. What we have now is the honor system, where all you have to do is claim you have nowhere else to go. Addiction is often the cause of homelessness and if someone is CHOOSING to spend all their financial resources on a recreational drug habit, it should not fall on the working taxpayers to put a roof over their head. Even a pack-a day cigarette habit costs $250 per month these days. In case the demoprogs in Montpelier didn’t get the memo from last November’s election, the country is shifting back to a reasonable sense of personal responsibility. Thank you Mr. Roper for bringing up the issue.
What isn’t mentioned is that Vermont has the oldest population in the country at something like 55 or 56 on average. That’s a lot of people close to retirement. How long are those people supposed to work to keep people housed when they are struggling themselves. When I retire from the military in three years, I am leaving myself. The voucher program simply isn’t sustainable.
Yes, and have you noticed more and more “older” folks now working in various businesses, esp. Super Markets and Drug Stores?
When older people work in the convenience and ma and pa stores, they dont freak out and go into a blank stare when you ask for 2/3 of a pound of sliced turkey…
Westward Ho! ?? Certainly they are “attracting”…….possibly creating…..And these outfits are also bleeding our tax dollars [into whose pockets?] in the process…..
vtbeliever, “Where is Vermont Attorney General Clark now?” It gives me no pleasure to say that she is in the same place she has been since being elected, so close behind whatever the State of “Califailure” is pushing, that if they stop too quickly, she’ll break her nose ! Our A.G. is a young girl with no more real world experience than whatever dogma is preached in liberal “institutes of higher learning”. I don’t have much hope for the Vt. Attorneys General office or any other SOV Agency/Dept until the Progs, and wacked out Dems. are in our rear view mirror !
Stop bonding low income housing with tax payer money and watch the non profits go bankrupt. The non profits all need to be investigated in Vermont as where all the money has been spent and who has got rich laundering this money. Looks like the motel industry made out well with fifty thousand dollar per year for each motel room.